Message forum of the Feldgrau.com research community
Agreed. Bradley's greatest success was in remaking his image after the war.Reb wrote:The failure to close the gap may be traced to two reasons. One - the Americans sent a boy to a man's job. (Bradley) and two, so did the Brits (Monty).
Monty was way ahead of Bradley on the this but his reach exceeded his grasp.
So we have Monty - quite bright, and Bradley, not so bright, as our two highest ranking subordinates to Ike. I'm often surprised we won the war at all. But the net result was very high allied casualties - as is usually the case with cautious generals.
Every time I think of Huertgen Forest or Brest I get annoyed with Bradley all over again. What a joke that man was. But we didn't have much going for us at the time. Perhaps Collins in charge of First Army, Patton with Third and we clone somebody for Army Group commander - taking say, Monty's brain and Patton's heart!
Except at Arnhem?17 SS Panzer Grenadier wrote:But Monty was always too cautious.
I would suspect primarily because this was the only real route through to linkup with the Americans, and that Falaise and the surrounding area had been an Anglo-Canadian objective for some time. Difficult one though.PaulJ wrote:My question was -- why push southwards into the teeth of 1 SS Pz Korps in the first place? (Given that inevitably doing so would be tough slogging.)
May I refer you to Operations Perch, Epsom, Charnwood, Goodwood and Bluecoat.17.SS Panzer Grenadier wrote:But Monty was always too cautious.